Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
#More great moments in GOP courage!
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Zepp
May 9, 2013, 1:41:33 PM5/9/13
to
Republican Senators Boycott Vote On Gina McCarthy’s Nomination To Head
EPA
Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be EPA
Administrator.
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to vote
today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next EPA
Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
thousand of the committee’s questions, Senate Republicans announced just
before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
The committee rules require that at least two members of the minority
party be present during a vote. Not a single Republican bothered to show
up.
Senator Barbara Boxer, Chair of the committee, still held a meeting,
allowing the Democrats in attendance to try to explain to the American
people why they still have no EPA Administrator. The ostensible reason
that the Republicans boycotted today’s vote was because they said she did
not satisfactorily answer their questions. Senator Boxer reminded those
present that Gina McCarthy has already answered more than a thousand
questions from the committee and moreover is eminently qualified with an
excellent track record of working with the business community and and
both parties to do her job. Boxer later floated the idea of changing the
rules of the committee so that a boycott such as this would not gum up
the works. She urged her GOP colleagues to listen to the many
“mainstream” Republicans who support Gina McCarthy’s nomination and “get
out of the fringe lane.” If senators oppose a nominee, they should show
up and vote against the nominee, not hold the process hostage for
ideological reasons.
In 2009, the Senate easily confirmed the highly qualified McCarthy by a
voice vote to head the Clean Air division of the EPA. With nearly three
decades of experience working at the local, state and federal levels,
McCarthy has been a champion for clean air and has even won plaudits from
Republican leaders. She has received extensive support from business,
health officials, environmental organizations and scientists, who have
repeatedly suggested she is willing to work with all sides to find the
best outcome.
At her confirmation hearing last month, Ms. McCarthy answered the
committee’s questions and the Republican members failed to pin anything
on her. Instead they focused on climate denier talking points and
questions about instant messenger (something that McCarthy jovially
admitted she was too old to know how to use.)
At today’s meeting, Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) argued that she deserved a
vote because she answered all the questions that had been asked of her.
He said that former EPA Administrators were used to questions (400 for
Mike Leavitt, 100 for Lisa Jackson), but Ms. McCarthy’s 1,000 was
unprecedented. “It’s bad for our country,” he said, when Senators fail to
do their jobs to ensure that the executive branch does not turn into a
“swiss cheese” of vacant seats, acting administrators, and delayed
appointments.
Carper said she has been a proven public servant: “The president didn’t
nominate somebody we don’t know. He nominated somebody who’d been
unanimously confirmed by this committee and I think maybe by the senate”
for her current position at the EPA.
Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) spoke more broadly about the “pattern” of
legislators shirking their responsibilities, thundering, “this is wrong!”
He pointed out that Jeff Holmstead, former EPA air chief under George W.
Bush, said “McCarthy has shown a willingness to listen to and understand
industry’s legitimate concerns.” William Becker, head of the National
Association of Clean Air Agencies, said “She’s brutally honest, very
fair, humorous, and an incredibly hard worker. She’s not an ideologue.
She’s a practitioner.”
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said that once the minority party showed up
and McCarthy got 10 votes in the committee, the nomination would then go
the to floor of the Senate. There, he argued that Majority Leader Reid
should amend the rules such that the majority party had the ability to
confirm nominees with 51 votes. As the committee Democrats spoke, Senator
Reid was on the senate floor, speaking about the larger problem of
Republican obstructionism:
Just this morning, the Republican members of the Senate Environment
and Public Works Committee sent a letter to Chairman Boxer indicating
they will boycott committee markup of Ms. McCarthy’s nomination. This
type of blanket, partisan obstruction used to be unheard of. Now it has
become an unacceptable pattern.
Senator Boxer closed the hearing promising to take this obstructionist
story to the American people. “Gina McCarthy is a women who deserves this
promotion.” As EPA administrator, McCarthy would build upon her record of
success in both the Obama Administration and the state-level programs she
helped put into place for both Republican and Democratic governors.
EPA
Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be EPA
Administrator.
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to vote
today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next EPA
Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
thousand of the committee’s questions, Senate Republicans announced just
before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
The committee rules require that at least two members of the minority
party be present during a vote. Not a single Republican bothered to show
up.
Senator Barbara Boxer, Chair of the committee, still held a meeting,
allowing the Democrats in attendance to try to explain to the American
people why they still have no EPA Administrator. The ostensible reason
that the Republicans boycotted today’s vote was because they said she did
not satisfactorily answer their questions. Senator Boxer reminded those
present that Gina McCarthy has already answered more than a thousand
questions from the committee and moreover is eminently qualified with an
excellent track record of working with the business community and and
both parties to do her job. Boxer later floated the idea of changing the
rules of the committee so that a boycott such as this would not gum up
the works. She urged her GOP colleagues to listen to the many
“mainstream” Republicans who support Gina McCarthy’s nomination and “get
out of the fringe lane.” If senators oppose a nominee, they should show
up and vote against the nominee, not hold the process hostage for
ideological reasons.
In 2009, the Senate easily confirmed the highly qualified McCarthy by a
voice vote to head the Clean Air division of the EPA. With nearly three
decades of experience working at the local, state and federal levels,
McCarthy has been a champion for clean air and has even won plaudits from
Republican leaders. She has received extensive support from business,
health officials, environmental organizations and scientists, who have
repeatedly suggested she is willing to work with all sides to find the
best outcome.
At her confirmation hearing last month, Ms. McCarthy answered the
committee’s questions and the Republican members failed to pin anything
on her. Instead they focused on climate denier talking points and
questions about instant messenger (something that McCarthy jovially
admitted she was too old to know how to use.)
At today’s meeting, Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) argued that she deserved a
vote because she answered all the questions that had been asked of her.
He said that former EPA Administrators were used to questions (400 for
Mike Leavitt, 100 for Lisa Jackson), but Ms. McCarthy’s 1,000 was
unprecedented. “It’s bad for our country,” he said, when Senators fail to
do their jobs to ensure that the executive branch does not turn into a
“swiss cheese” of vacant seats, acting administrators, and delayed
appointments.
Carper said she has been a proven public servant: “The president didn’t
nominate somebody we don’t know. He nominated somebody who’d been
unanimously confirmed by this committee and I think maybe by the senate”
for her current position at the EPA.
Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) spoke more broadly about the “pattern” of
legislators shirking their responsibilities, thundering, “this is wrong!”
He pointed out that Jeff Holmstead, former EPA air chief under George W.
Bush, said “McCarthy has shown a willingness to listen to and understand
industry’s legitimate concerns.” William Becker, head of the National
Association of Clean Air Agencies, said “She’s brutally honest, very
fair, humorous, and an incredibly hard worker. She’s not an ideologue.
She’s a practitioner.”
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said that once the minority party showed up
and McCarthy got 10 votes in the committee, the nomination would then go
the to floor of the Senate. There, he argued that Majority Leader Reid
should amend the rules such that the majority party had the ability to
confirm nominees with 51 votes. As the committee Democrats spoke, Senator
Reid was on the senate floor, speaking about the larger problem of
Republican obstructionism:
Just this morning, the Republican members of the Senate Environment
and Public Works Committee sent a letter to Chairman Boxer indicating
they will boycott committee markup of Ms. McCarthy’s nomination. This
type of blanket, partisan obstruction used to be unheard of. Now it has
become an unacceptable pattern.
Senator Boxer closed the hearing promising to take this obstructionist
story to the American people. “Gina McCarthy is a women who deserves this
promotion.” As EPA administrator, McCarthy would build upon her record of
success in both the Obama Administration and the state-level programs she
helped put into place for both Republican and Democratic governors.
Lee
May 9, 2013, 2:28:08 PM5/9/13
to
a fellow Repuplican (Hagel) just because Obama
nominated him there is no hope for a fair hearing
for anyone else. They would block Jesus Christ
himself if he was nominated by Obama.
Zepp
May 9, 2013, 3:05:07 PM5/9/13
to
opel
May 9, 2013, 4:50:57 PM5/9/13
to
On 5/9/2013 1:05 PM, Zepp wrote:
> Party first, and fuck the country!
THAT WHAT YER PARENTS DID WHEN THEy ABANDONED CANUCKISTAN AND DUMPED
> Party first, and fuck the country!
YOUR SORRY ASS HERE?
Kurt Nicklas
May 9, 2013, 4:53:10 PM5/9/13
to
On May 9, 4:50 pm, opel <a...@novalid.org.> wrote:
trying to do to
every slut he's met since middle school
> On 5/9/2013 1:05 PM, Zepp314 wrote:
>
> > Party first, and fuck the country!
>
> THAT WHAT YER PARENTS DID WHEN THEy ABANDONED CANUCKISTAN AND DUMPED
> YOUR SORRY ASS HERE?
He's claiming that the GOP has done to the country what he's been
>
> > Party first, and fuck the country!
>
> THAT WHAT YER PARENTS DID WHEN THEy ABANDONED CANUCKISTAN AND DUMPED
> YOUR SORRY ASS HERE?
trying to do to
every slut he's met since middle school
Mr. B1ack
May 9, 2013, 6:51:31 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 9 May 2013 17:41:33 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
> Republican Senators Boycott Vote On Gina McCarthy�s Nomination To Head
>EPA
>
>Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
>
>Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be EPA
>Administrator.
>
>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to vote
>today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next EPA
>Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
>thousand of the committee�s questions, Senate Republicans announced just
>before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
>committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
Well, this is just regular politics and
> Republican Senators Boycott Vote On Gina McCarthy�s Nomination To Head
>EPA
>
>Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
>
>Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be EPA
>Administrator.
>
>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to vote
>today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next EPA
>Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
>thousand of the committee�s questions, Senate Republicans announced just
>before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
>committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
political strategy ...
The GOP wants certain things in return for
showing up and voting.
Of course we can live without an EPA
administrator for awhile - the underlings
do the real work anyway - so this ploy
won't give the GOP *much* leverage.
Zepp
May 9, 2013, 8:37:52 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:51:31 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 17:41:33 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>
>> Republican Senators Boycott Vote On Gina McCarthy’s Nomination To Head
>>EPA
>>
>>Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
>>
>>Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be EPA
>>Administrator.
>>
>>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to vote
>>today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next EPA
>>Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
>>thousand of the committee’s questions, Senate Republicans announced
just
>>before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
>>committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
>
>
> Well, this is just regular politics and political strategy ...
No, it really isn't. I defy you to find a time in the history of the
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 17:41:33 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>
>> Republican Senators Boycott Vote On Gina McCarthy’s Nomination To Head
>>EPA
>>
>>Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
>>
>>Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be EPA
>>Administrator.
>>
>>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to vote
>>today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next EPA
>>Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
>>thousand of the committee’s questions, Senate Republicans announced
just
>>before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
>>committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
>
>
> Well, this is just regular politics and political strategy ...
United States when a political party was so cowardly and ethically
bankrupt that it boycotted a committee vote on a cabinet-level
appointee. Even in the years leading up to the Civil War, the parties
had more honesty and class then that.
>
> The GOP wants certain things in return for showing up and voting.
Don't you get tired of blackmailing the country, you fascist fuck?
> The GOP wants certain things in return for showing up and voting.
Kurt Nicklas
May 9, 2013, 9:01:14 PM5/9/13
to
On May 9, 8:37 pm, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:51:31 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:51:31 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
> > On Thu, 9 May 2013 17:41:33 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>
> >> Republican Senators Boycott Vote On Gina McCarthy’s Nomination To Head
> >>EPA
>
> >>Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
>
> >>Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be EPA
> >>Administrator.
>
> >>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to vote
> >>today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next EPA
> >>Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
> >>thousand of the committee’s questions, Senate Republicans announced
> just
> >>before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
> >>committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
>
> > Well, this is just regular politics and political strategy ...
>
> No, it really isn't. I defy you to find a time in the history of the
> United States when a political party was so cowardly and ethically
> bankrupt that it boycotted a committee vote on a cabinet-level
> appointee.
2003
>
> >> Republican Senators Boycott Vote On Gina McCarthy’s Nomination To Head
> >>EPA
>
> >>Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
>
> >>Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be EPA
> >>Administrator.
>
> >>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to vote
> >>today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next EPA
> >>Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
> >>thousand of the committee’s questions, Senate Republicans announced
> just
> >>before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
> >>committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
>
> > Well, this is just regular politics and political strategy ...
>
> No, it really isn't. I defy you to find a time in the history of the
> United States when a political party was so cowardly and ethically
> bankrupt that it boycotted a committee vote on a cabinet-level
> appointee.
Michael Leavitt, Bush's choice to head the EPA
democrats boycotted the confirmation hearings
Now, 314, don't you feel STUPID?
You should.
Enraged Apostate, World Citizen
May 9, 2013, 9:42:19 PM5/9/13
to
opel <ad...@novalid.org.> wrote on Thu 09 May 2013 01:50:57p
What's your pathological obsession with the poster, you sick, twisted dumfuk?
Go back to whatever you were doing with your sister.
--
The Enraged Apostate
Right-wing talking points show a popular appeal in
the same way that trainwrecks are morbidly fascinating.
But soon after the desire to be horrified at the spectacle passes,
the realization soon follows that it is all an ugly, bloody mess,
and it will only be cleaned up with leftist methods and a liberal in charge.
Go back to whatever you were doing with your sister.
--
The Enraged Apostate
Right-wing talking points show a popular appeal in
the same way that trainwrecks are morbidly fascinating.
But soon after the desire to be horrified at the spectacle passes,
the realization soon follows that it is all an ugly, bloody mess,
and it will only be cleaned up with leftist methods and a liberal in charge.
Mr. B1ack
May 9, 2013, 10:08:03 PM5/9/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 00:37:52 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:51:31 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 17:41:33 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Republican Senators Boycott Vote On Gina McCarthy?s Nomination To Head
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:51:31 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 17:41:33 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>EPA
>>>
>>>Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
>>>
>>>Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be EPA
>>>Administrator.
>>>
>>>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to vote
>>>today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next EPA
>>>Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
>>>thousand of the committee?s questions, Senate Republicans announced
>>>
>>>Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
>>>
>>>Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be EPA
>>>Administrator.
>>>
>>>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to vote
>>>today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next EPA
>>>Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
>just
>>>before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
>>>committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
>>
>>
>> Well, this is just regular politics and political strategy ...
>
>No, it really isn't.
Yes it is. But since it inconveniences yer Lord
>>>before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
>>>committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
>>
>>
>> Well, this is just regular politics and political strategy ...
>
>No, it really isn't.
it SEEMS extraordinary and unprecedented.
>I defy you to find a time in the history of the
>United States when a political party was so cowardly and ethically
>bankrupt that it boycotted a committee vote on a cabinet-level
>appointee. Even in the years leading up to the Civil War, the parties
>had more honesty and class then that.
a fairly new country in the world.
Suffice to say that lessons in asymmetrical warfare
are being learned from our experiences with the VC,
Taliban and al-Qaida. Find the weak point, a pivot
point, where a little pressure can yeild a
disproportional result and PUSH. In this case the
pivot point is the rules of the committee process
and by those rules doing nothing amounts to doing
a lot of something.
Political judo. Clever, not cowardly. But then I
guess you thought all 'conservatives' had 2-digit
IQs and couldn't think up such moves hmmm ?
Well, Obama is gonna have to DEAL ... and the GOP
will set the terms of the deal. Maybe they just
want a different nominee, or maybe they'll let
him have McCarthy but actually want something
entirely different in compensation.
But fear not, the Dems will pull similar tricks
on the next Republican prez. Never a tit without
a tat in DC.
>> The GOP wants certain things in return for showing up and voting.
>
>Don't you get tired of blackmailing the country, you fascist fuck?
Zepp
May 9, 2013, 10:07:55 PM5/9/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 01:42:19 +0000, Enraged Apostate, World Citizen wrote:
> opel <ad...@novalid.org.> wrote on Thu 09 May 2013 01:50:57p
>
>> On 5/9/2013 1:05 PM, Zepp wrote:
>>> Party first, and fuck the country!
>>
>> THAT WHAT YER PARENTS DID WHEN THEy ABANDONED CANUCKISTAN AND DUMPED
>> YOUR SORRY ASS HERE?
>
>
> What's your pathological obsession with the poster, you sick, twisted
> dumfuk?
>
> Go back to whatever you were doing with your sister.
I've spanked poor old Opie so hard and so often that the poor boy's
> opel <ad...@novalid.org.> wrote on Thu 09 May 2013 01:50:57p
>
>> On 5/9/2013 1:05 PM, Zepp wrote:
>>> Party first, and fuck the country!
>>
>> THAT WHAT YER PARENTS DID WHEN THEy ABANDONED CANUCKISTAN AND DUMPED
>> YOUR SORRY ASS HERE?
>
>
> What's your pathological obsession with the poster, you sick, twisted
> dumfuk?
>
> Go back to whatever you were doing with your sister.
developed a syndrome.
I really shouldn't play with the right wingers. They break so easily.
Zepp
May 9, 2013, 10:18:23 PM5/9/13
to
8"
Eight votes against in the full Senate, and you expect me to believe the
Dems boycotted a vote in one committee?
Zepp
May 9, 2013, 11:03:33 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:08:03 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 00:37:52 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:51:31 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 17:41:33 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Republican Senators Boycott Vote On Gina McCarthy?s Nomination To
>>>> Head
>>>>EPA
>>>>
>>>>Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
>>>>
>>>>Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be
>>>>EPA Administrator.
>>>>
>>>>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to
>>>>vote today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next
>>>>EPA Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
>>>>thousand of the committee?s questions, Senate Republicans announced
>>just
>>>>before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
>>>>committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, this is just regular politics and political strategy ...
>>
>>No, it really isn't.
>
>
> Yes it is. But since it inconveniences yer Lord it SEEMS
> extraordinary and unprecedented.
What Lord is that? If you say Obama I'm going to laugh my head off at
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 00:37:52 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:51:31 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 17:41:33 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Republican Senators Boycott Vote On Gina McCarthy?s Nomination To
>>>> Head
>>>>EPA
>>>>
>>>>Posted: 09 May 2013 08:53 AM PDT
>>>>
>>>>Zero Republicans show up to vote on Gina McCarthy's nomination to be
>>>>EPA Administrator.
>>>>
>>>>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee was scheduled to
>>>>vote today at 9:15 on the nomination of Gina McCarthy to be the next
>>>>EPA Administrator. Despite the fact that she has answered more than a
>>>>thousand of the committee?s questions, Senate Republicans announced
>>just
>>>>before the hearing that they would be boycotting the vote, denying the
>>>>committee quorum and postponing the confirmation hearing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, this is just regular politics and political strategy ...
>>
>>No, it really isn't.
>
>
> Yes it is. But since it inconveniences yer Lord it SEEMS
> extraordinary and unprecedented.
you.
>
>
>>I defy you to find a time in the history of the United States when a
>>political party was so cowardly and ethically bankrupt that it boycotted
>>a committee vote on a cabinet-level appointee. Even in the years
>>leading up to the Civil War, the parties had more honesty and class then
>>that.
>
> I'm unaware of it happening in the USA ... but we're a fairly new
> country in the world.
>
Yeah, only 226 years old (counting from when the Constitution was
>
>>I defy you to find a time in the history of the United States when a
>>political party was so cowardly and ethically bankrupt that it boycotted
>>a committee vote on a cabinet-level appointee. Even in the years
>>leading up to the Civil War, the parties had more honesty and class then
>>that.
>
> I'm unaware of it happening in the USA ... but we're a fairly new
> country in the world.
>
ratified). Well, I guess you'll be finding out what happens to countries
where one or more political parties find that acceptable behaviour. It
won't be pretty.
> Suffice to say that lessons in asymmetrical warfare are being learned
> from our experiences with the VC, Taliban and al-Qaida. Find the weak
> point, a pivot point, where a little pressure can yeild a
> disproportional result and PUSH. In this case the pivot point is the
> rules of the committee process and by those rules doing nothing
> amounts to doing a lot of something.
>
to see the Americans are finally getting caught up.
> Political judo. Clever, not cowardly. But then I guess you thought
> all 'conservatives' had 2-digit IQs and couldn't think up such moves
> hmmm ?
>
> Well, Obama is gonna have to DEAL ... and the GOP will set the terms
> of the deal. Maybe they just want a different nominee, or maybe
> they'll let him have McCarthy but actually want something entirely
> different in compensation.
>
> But fear not, the Dems will pull similar tricks on the next
> Republican prez. Never a tit without a tat in DC.
>
>
>>> The GOP wants certain things in return for showing up and voting.
>>
>>Don't you get tired of blackmailing the country, you fascist fuck?
>
>
> Saving the country from 'liberal' dimwits ...
and so on...
Mr. B1ack
May 10, 2013, 3:24:17 AM5/10/13
to
>> Suffice to say that lessons in asymmetrical warfare are being learned
>> from our experiences with the VC, Taliban and al-Qaida. Find the weak
>> point, a pivot point, where a little pressure can yeild a
>> disproportional result and PUSH. In this case the pivot point is the
>> rules of the committee process and by those rules doing nothing
>> amounts to doing a lot of something.
>>
>Yeah, Sun Tzu made mention of that a couple of thousand years ago. Good
>to see the Americans are finally getting caught up.
the uptake dontchaknow.
But once we DO learn .....
>> Political judo. Clever, not cowardly. But then I guess you thought
>> all 'conservatives' had 2-digit IQs and couldn't think up such moves
>> hmmm ?
>>
>> Well, Obama is gonna have to DEAL ... and the GOP will set the terms
>> of the deal. Maybe they just want a different nominee, or maybe
>> they'll let him have McCarthy but actually want something entirely
>> different in compensation.
>>
>> But fear not, the Dems will pull similar tricks on the next
>> Republican prez. Never a tit without a tat in DC.
>>
>>
>>>> The GOP wants certain things in return for showing up and voting.
>>>
>>>Don't you get tired of blackmailing the country, you fascist fuck?
>>
>>
>> Saving the country from 'liberal' dimwits ...
>
>Much the way Hitler saved Germany from intellectuals and trade unionists
>and so on...
Lessons can be learned, and applied.
Go back to Canadatopia Zeppie. Things are gonna
just get more and more unpleasant here. The status
quo isn't good enough anymore. Them times they are
a-changin' once again.
And yes, if things get bad enough, we may indeed
wind up with a furher ... someone who will promise to
bring order. Won't be pretty. The chaos and degraditon
your 'liberals' have worked so hard at will backfire.
You haven't sown the seeds for commietopia, but for
fascistopia instead.
Steve
May 10, 2013, 5:48:55 AM5/10/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 02:07:55 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 01:42:19 +0000, Enraged Apostate, World Citizen wrote:
>
>> opel <ad...@novalid.org.> wrote on Thu 09 May 2013 01:50:57p
>>
>>> On 5/9/2013 1:05 PM, Zepp wrote:
>>>> Party first, and fuck the country!
>>>
>>> THAT WHAT YER PARENTS DID WHEN THEy ABANDONED CANUCKISTAN AND DUMPED
>>> YOUR SORRY ASS HERE?
>>
>>
>> What's your pathological obsession with the poster, you sick, twisted
>> dumfuk?
>>
>> Go back to whatever you were doing with your sister.
>
>I've spanked poor old Opie so hard and so often that the poor boy's
>developed a syndrome.
Zepp does have his fantasies...
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 01:42:19 +0000, Enraged Apostate, World Citizen wrote:
>
>> opel <ad...@novalid.org.> wrote on Thu 09 May 2013 01:50:57p
>>
>>> On 5/9/2013 1:05 PM, Zepp wrote:
>>>> Party first, and fuck the country!
>>>
>>> THAT WHAT YER PARENTS DID WHEN THEy ABANDONED CANUCKISTAN AND DUMPED
>>> YOUR SORRY ASS HERE?
>>
>>
>> What's your pathological obsession with the poster, you sick, twisted
>> dumfuk?
>>
>> Go back to whatever you were doing with your sister.
>
>I've spanked poor old Opie so hard and so often that the poor boy's
>developed a syndrome.
Zepp
May 10, 2013, 11:11:40 AM5/10/13
to
opel
May 10, 2013, 2:16:38 PM5/10/13
to
On 5/10/2013 9:11 AM, Zepp wrote:
> Do you live near a large city? If you do, you're fucked.
Folks know just where you are now - enjoy.
> Do you live near a large city? If you do, you're fucked.
Liberal Here
May 10, 2013, 3:45:17 PM5/10/13
to
opel
May 10, 2013, 3:52:56 PM5/10/13
to
On 5/10/2013 1:45 PM, Liberal Here wrote:
> Zepp's yer dad?????
Zepp managed the first Rosie Palmer pregnancy?
> Zepp's yer dad?????
Zepp managed the first Rosie Palmer pregnancy?
Liberal Here
May 10, 2013, 3:53:23 PM5/10/13
to
On May 10, 3:24 am, Mr. B1ack <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
Oops...limit your admission to conservatives and looneytunarians.
After all, not all Americans are conservative or looneytunarian. Some
are rational.
>
> But once we DO learn .....
You immediately forget it if it's even faintly liberal.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Political judo. Clever, not cowardly. But then I guess you thought
> >> all 'conservatives' had 2-digit IQs and couldn't think up such moves
> >> hmmm ?
>
> >> Well, Obama is gonna have to DEAL ... and the GOP will set the terms
> >> of the deal. Maybe they just want a different nominee, or maybe
> >> they'll let him have McCarthy but actually want something entirely
> >> different in compensation.
>
> >> But fear not, the Dems will pull similar tricks on the next
> >> Republican prez. Never a tit without a tat in DC.
>
> >>>> The GOP wants certain things in return for showing up and voting.
>
> >>>Don't you get tired of blackmailing the country, you fascist fuck?
>
> >> Saving the country from 'liberal' dimwits ...
>
> >Much the way Hitler saved Germany from intellectuals and trade unionists
> >and so on...
>
> He wasn't very good at it.
He got rid of them, didn't he?
America has a bit of the same problem....you fascists rail against
liberal ideas, implement conservative alternatives....the economy
collapses and the nation tries to go back to enlightened, liberal
leadership. But there are sufficient crazy conservative true-believers
to slow down improvement.
>
> Lessons can be learned, and applied.
>
> Go back to Canadatopia Zeppie. Things are gonna
> just get more and more unpleasant here. The status
> quo isn't good enough anymore. Them times they are
> a-changin' once again.
>
> And yes, if things get bad enough, we may indeed
> wind up with a furher ... someone who will promise to
> bring order. Won't be pretty. The chaos and degraditon
> your 'liberals' have worked so hard at will backfire.
> You haven't sown the seeds for commietopia, but for
> fascistopia instead.
Prove it, show evidence.
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 03:03:33 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
> >On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:08:03 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:08:03 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>
> >> On Fri, 10 May 2013 00:37:52 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>
> >>>On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:51:31 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>
>
> >>>On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:51:31 -0400, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>
After all, not all Americans are conservative or looneytunarian. Some
are rational.
>
> But once we DO learn .....
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> Political judo. Clever, not cowardly. But then I guess you thought
> >> all 'conservatives' had 2-digit IQs and couldn't think up such moves
> >> hmmm ?
>
> >> Well, Obama is gonna have to DEAL ... and the GOP will set the terms
> >> of the deal. Maybe they just want a different nominee, or maybe
> >> they'll let him have McCarthy but actually want something entirely
> >> different in compensation.
>
> >> But fear not, the Dems will pull similar tricks on the next
> >> Republican prez. Never a tit without a tat in DC.
>
> >>>> The GOP wants certain things in return for showing up and voting.
>
> >>>Don't you get tired of blackmailing the country, you fascist fuck?
>
> >> Saving the country from 'liberal' dimwits ...
>
> >Much the way Hitler saved Germany from intellectuals and trade unionists
> >and so on...
>
> He wasn't very good at it.
America has a bit of the same problem....you fascists rail against
liberal ideas, implement conservative alternatives....the economy
collapses and the nation tries to go back to enlightened, liberal
leadership. But there are sufficient crazy conservative true-believers
to slow down improvement.
>
> Lessons can be learned, and applied.
>
> Go back to Canadatopia Zeppie. Things are gonna
> just get more and more unpleasant here. The status
> quo isn't good enough anymore. Them times they are
> a-changin' once again.
>
> And yes, if things get bad enough, we may indeed
> wind up with a furher ... someone who will promise to
> bring order. Won't be pretty. The chaos and degraditon
> your 'liberals' have worked so hard at will backfire.
> You haven't sown the seeds for commietopia, but for
> fascistopia instead.
opel
May 10, 2013, 4:35:31 PM5/10/13
to
On 5/10/2013 1:53 PM, Liberal Here wrote:
> You immediately forget it if it's even faintly liberal.
True, liberalism forgets or constantly revises history.
> You immediately forget it if it's even faintly liberal.
Zepp
May 10, 2013, 6:24:18 PM5/10/13
to
0 new messages